4 ms·

I love how everyone involved always jumps on the most extreme version of the lab leak hypothesis "Chinese government made COVID super weapon" and then use that

I love how everyone involved always jumps on the most extreme version of the lab leak hypothesis "Chinese government made COVID super weapon" and then use that to discount everything else instead of admitting the much more nuanced reality of the situation. The lab leak hypothesis has a range from "This virus was created and released by the Chinese government as a bio-weapon against the US and to kill off their own aging population" at the extreme. To the "The virus was being studied at the Wuhan Virology Institute and someone one got lax on safety protocols got exposed accidentally and then took the train home." Most people that seem to argue against lab leak, seem to assume everyone ascribes to the first position, whereas the majority of the people that believe in the lab leak subscribe to the later position, including myself.

throwawayxxcf 4y ago
The conflation and smearing that happens whenever an accidental lab leak is brought up, makes me suspicious. As an example, I used to edit Wikipedia articles in the area, but I gave up, because some editors made a concerted effort to discredit it as a "conspiracy theory" and had boundless energy to shut it down. It seems to be the opposite to the much vaunted "fearless scientific transparency" that's sold to the public as a hallmark of science. I guess that in a generation or two, when vested interests move on, there may be more willingness to explore this.
autoexec 4y ago
> The lab leak hypothesis has a range from "This virus was created and released by the Chinese government as a bio-weapon against the US and to kill off their own aging population" at the extreme. To the "The virus was being studied at the Wuhan Virology Institute and someone one got lax on safety protocols got exposed accidentally and then took the train home." And people on either end of that spectrum should be expected to have substantial evidence to support their position since the far simpler and common scenario is that it wasn't leaked from the lab at all. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" applies much more to the government bio-weapon crowd, but it still absolutely applies to the 'employee mistake' theory too.
- LawTalkingGuy 4y ago
  There are two indicators, one simply how close it was to a virus lab doing similar studies, and two how immediately and blindly people denied that they could be any connection. They'd have had to investigate before making a claim, and had not, so obviously they're lying. A concerted conspiracy to deny an option is some evidence for that option being true. I don't claim it did come from a lab, but that anyone stating categorically that it did not is lying.
- JamesBarney 4y ago
  Why is - a virus unusually adapted to being transmitted between people - which was released next to one of a handful of labs on earth that studied it - that the Chinese government and several American scientists tried to cover up - normally found a thousand of miles away - that we can't find an origin for unlike SARS and MERS (with far more looking) isn't also an at least equally extraordinary claim?
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
mistermann 4y ago
> I love how everyone involved always jumps on the most extreme version of the lab leak hypothesis "Chinese government made COVID super weapon" and then use that to discount everything else instead of admitting the much more nuanced reality of the situation. I think a decent argument could be made that this phenomenon (in its abstract form, not specifically this variation of it) is more dangerous than covid, or even a virus much more dealy. Who knows how much damage this does to the world considering how widely it exists?
bayesian_horse 4y ago
"Gain of Function" research is brought up very often in this context. A natural virus would first need to get into the lab in order to escape from it. I'd argue it's a lot harder and less probably for a bat Virus - which isn't adapted to Humans yet - to be collected by a lab, then infect a researcher, then continue the chain in Humans, rather than the same virus making it from the Jungle to a Human population without involving some researchers. Even more likely, Sars-Cov-2 widely circulated in the intermediary hosts and had thousands of contacts with Humans until one lineage "stuck" because it finally matched.

throwawayxxcf 4y ago

The conflation and smearing that happens whenever an accidental lab leak is brought up, makes me suspicious. As an example, I used to edit Wikipedia articles in the area, but I gave up, because some editors made a concerted effort to discredit it as a "conspiracy theory" and had boundless energy to shut it down. It seems to be the opposite to the much vaunted "fearless scientific transparency" that's sold to the public as a hallmark of science. I guess that in a generation or two, when vested interests move on, there may be more willingness to explore this.

autoexec 4y ago

> The lab leak hypothesis has a range from "This virus was created and released by the Chinese government as a bio-weapon against the US and to kill off their own aging population" at the extreme. To the "The virus was being studied at the Wuhan Virology Institute and someone one got lax on safety protocols got exposed accidentally and then took the train home." And people on either end of that spectrum should be expected to have substantial evidence to support their position since the far simpler and common scenario is that it wasn't leaked from the lab at all. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" applies much more to the government bio-weapon crowd, but it still absolutely applies to the 'employee mistake' theory too.

LawTalkingGuy 4y ago
There are two indicators, one simply how close it was to a virus lab doing similar studies, and two how immediately and blindly people denied that they could be any connection. They'd have had to investigate before making a claim, and had not, so obviously they're lying. A concerted conspiracy to deny an option is some evidence for that option being true. I don't claim it did come from a lab, but that anyone stating categorically that it did not is lying.
JamesBarney 4y ago
Why is - a virus unusually adapted to being transmitted between people - which was released next to one of a handful of labs on earth that studied it - that the Chinese government and several American scientists tried to cover up - normally found a thousand of miles away - that we can't find an origin for unlike SARS and MERS (with far more looking) isn't also an at least equally extraordinary claim?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

mistermann 4y ago

> I love how everyone involved always jumps on the most extreme version of the lab leak hypothesis "Chinese government made COVID super weapon" and then use that to discount everything else instead of admitting the much more nuanced reality of the situation. I think a decent argument could be made that this phenomenon (in its abstract form, not specifically this variation of it) is more dangerous than covid, or even a virus much more dealy. Who knows how much damage this does to the world considering how widely it exists?

bayesian_horse 4y ago

"Gain of Function" research is brought up very often in this context. A natural virus would first need to get into the lab in order to escape from it. I'd argue it's a lot harder and less probably for a bat Virus - which isn't adapted to Humans yet - to be collected by a lab, then infect a researcher, then continue the chain in Humans, rather than the same virus making it from the Jungle to a Human population without involving some researchers. Even more likely, Sars-Cov-2 widely circulated in the intermediary hosts and had thousands of contacts with Humans until one lineage "stuck" because it finally matched.